Pages

Translate

Wednesday, 4 February 2004

That is what it sounds like to me at the moment. The way in which the interviewer on the piece about the presidential election campaign in the US allowed the Israeli mouthpiece to employ stereotypes, racist comments, and other expressions of zionist apartheid imperialism grated on my nerves. I am more accustomed to hard-hitting interviews in which this kind of rhetoric is challenged than a simple handing over of the mic so that BBC becomes nothing more than yet another podium for Israeli politicians to rationalise their apartheid policies.

Ever since you allowed yourselves to be censored by the Israelis, you have reduced yourselves to a welcome mat for racist apartheid Israeli politicians to walk all over you. Even tiny community-based listener-sponsored such as Pacifica Network have begun to edge past you as far as journalism goes. Don't you remember? You're journalists. Not stenographers. The former have value. The latter are worthless and a waste of m time.

Monday, 2 February 2004

Once again, the BBC has allowed itself to be used as another microphone into which pro-apartheid zionist Israelis are allowed to spew their racism. This interview took place in lieu of the internationally illegal murder of an unarmed adult male civilian and a male child by an American-made taxpayer-funded Israeli helicopter gunship and the internationally illegal murder of a Palestinian civilian by an armed force which had invaded Palestine and was occupying Palestinian territory in contravention of international law. The Israeli spokesperson who was interviewed spewed racism to such an extent that had any non-caucasian, much less a Palestinian, said the same things of a caucasian, he would have been interrupted; and an explanation would have been demanded of him. First of all, this Israeli denied the internationally standardised term "targeted assassination," which appears in several codes of international law banning the illegal practise. He then went on to claim that "Palestinian terrorism goes on unabated", when anyone who has been observing the Palestinian situation knows that the situation has been quite the opposite. There have been several times in the past three years during which the Palestinian people have endured an illegal and brutal zionist invasion and occupation of their homeland with murders of unarmed civilian men, women, and children in their streets, places of business, schools, homes, and places of worship months at a time without a single martyrdom attack in Israeli territory. Rather than the Israelis "suffering" an "unabated" spate of "Palestinian terrorism", the situation is that the Palestinian people have been suffering three years straight of apartheid zionist Israeli terrorism inside the internationally accepted borders of Palestine in direct contravention of several codes of international law. Thousands of innocent Palestinian men, women, and children have been slaughtered in the past three years, hundreds of homes demolished, mosques destroyed, infrastructure laid in ruins, and farmland razed. Try telling me when Palestine has inflicted such torture on the Israeli territories! And while international law recognises the right of Palestinian people to return to Palestine after having been illegally expelled from their homeland, as well as the right to self-determination, there is absolutely no recognition whatsoever for Israel to bomb Palestinians in the streets, in their homes, in their places of worship, or to impose illegal sanctions and curfews, or to imprison the Palestinian people in their own cities and homes.

It was absolutely shameful to hear the BBC interviewer leave stand the Israeli man's statements rationalising illegal Israeli attacks on Palestinian people, who had not beforehand been given the right to a lawful arrest, access to attorney or judge or jury of peers, internationally acceptable trial, or internationally acceptable sentencing. It does not matter what kind of "intelligence" these people have on the leaders of the Palestinian resistance to illegal Israeli invasion and occupation, how much they "know" about their "whereabouts, whom they meet with, whom they talk with", or "what they plan", the Israelis have no right under international law to "move before they move". It should be obvious from this belligerent attitude and absolute willingness - even eagerness! - to contravene international law over and over again - not even acknowledging international law - that it is not the Palestinian people who are "responsible for their own misery," but rather the very government and people who are attacking them and shutting their eyes and ears to such codes of international law as UN Security Council Resolutions, the Geneva Conventions, etc. It is this only remaining apartheid government in the world which is responsible for the misery of the Palestinian people; and it is these people who are so very dangerous - precisely because they have not been subjected to the due process of law which they so fully deserve.

In contrast to the attitude of quiet respect given to the Israeli spokesperson to complete his thoughts without interruption, the BBC interviewer constantly interrupted Muhammad al Hindi several times, hardly allowing him a single opportunity to respond to the accusations presented to him. In addition, he was not allowed a chance to face his Israeli accuser in a face-to-face interactive discussion. It is very interesting to note that, with full respect to al Hindi Sahib, more erudite speakers such as Sa'ib al Erakat or Hassan `Abdul-Rahman (from whom, oddly enough, we have not heard in ages) were not consulted. Most striking of all, however, was that Muhammad al Hindi was not even given 2/3 the time that the Israeli man was given in order to speak.

I can understand the need for balance and fairness in journalism, but this is hardly journalism. It rather feels like the stenography that is practised by American so-called "journalists". I honestly feel that the decision to allow pro-zionist special interest groups to monitor and censor BBC's reporting was a fatal error which has since been corroding the quality of BBC's reporting. We would appreciate a return to the more even-handed representation that used to exist, if not a fully unbiased reporting of the Palestinian struggle for freedom. Why not, then, hire a Palestinian consultant to similarly monitor and censor BBC's reporters?